Well many people have the ability to see through marketing BS, and these types of excuses are exactly that, marketing BS

I often feel sad for people that have not developed the critical thinking skills needed to look past marketing to where the realm of logic and reason resides

Patronising much?

The simple reality is that if your site is down because AWS is down then it means a lot of other sites are down too. Which means you don’t look anywhere near as bad as you would if you were the only site not working.

Logic and reason is all well and good but human perception is a very real thing that businesses need to keep in mind. It isn’t always entirely logical.

I would like to know of a time where all of AWS was down, every region, every data-center, everything down

At most one region was impacted, and it is easy to be multi-regional in AWS, in fact that is kinda of the point

Further this comment is in service of the moronic axiom of "No one ever got fired for buying <<insert large company>>" my response to that has always been and will always be "sure they have and they should"

It is simply not true that buying AWS, IBM, Cisco, or any other large vendor is complete insulator from all responsibility to maintain reliable systems nor should it be

Any administrator or developer that is making buying choices based on that is not an person I would like to ever work or do business with

“AWS is down” is phrasing shorthand, it doesn’t mean every single service they offer is nonfunctional. It means that for the vast majority of people it is not doing what it is supposed to do. Again, it’s not a technically correct statement but it is how humans talk.

To extrapolate out to the original point: if multiple top ten traffic web sites are having issues (and this has happened once or twice in the last few years due to AWS or other cloud issues) then your site being down is less notable in customers minds.

again that depends on who your "customers" are

The grandparent was talking about a SaaS service so then I would expect the customers to be technically minded people.

If you are selling to masses then sure, but if you are selling me a Line of Business SaaS service then no I do not care if facebook and reddit was down, that is not relevant to how the SaaS product should be running

I think that is a narrow definition of SaaS. But I understand your point.

For instance Basecamp could be down due to AWS. And Basecamp ( and in this case Hey as well ), but are SaaS. And their customer may not always be technically minded. Given the usage of these tools, while inside tech circle, are not only used by technical people.

And At the end of the day it is all about trade offs.

I also dont think anyone ever make a purchase decision purely on brand or not fired for X. For example, despite AMD offering lower price and offer more core and performance. Server Vendors hasn't all switched to AMD at once. In fact, Intel Server still has months of backlog order to fill. This isn't simply because Intel is better connected with Vendors, it is the fact most of those End user / customers are still demanding Intel CPU. Because it is well tested, with more specific libraries, tools, guarantees and support. Many of these factors cant be quantitatively measured, and therefore would only be judged when the final price difference are shown. In this case No one gets fire for using X is another phase for if it aren't broke, dont fix it.

I believe Xeon vs Epyc is more to do with the fact that migration from Xeon to Epyc is a disruptive process both at the hypervisor and guest level. Server hard ware changes today is

Install new host -> Migrate VM;s live to new host -> Shutdown old host

Zero Downtime

This is simply not possible with a Xeon to Epyc Migration which requires downtime, as well as testing of the guest to ensure nothing weird happens

it is a prime example of Vendor Lockin.

IF there was away to live migrate with zero downtime Epyc would own the datacenter today